Advertisement

Changing External Dimension: the EC Takes the Lead

  • Holly Wyatt-Walter
Part of the St Antony’s Series book series

Abstract

The crumbling of the Berlin Wall on 9 November 1989 was both the culmination of previous change in the USSR and Eastern Europe and the inauguration of a new period of change for the whole of Europe. The euphoria in Berlin as East and West met at the Brandenburg Gate was only possible because of the previous five years of perestroika and the activities of Mikhail Gorbachev. In this sense the end of the cold war started in 1985 and only reached fruition in 1989.

Keywords

Member State Security Policy Monetary Union Internal Integration Political Union 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 2.
    ‘East Trade Bloc Seeks Tie to West’, New York Times, 2 December 1987.Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    These agreements were variegated by state and limited in scope. However, the details of the agreements, and of the later Europe Agreements are not relevant to this thesis. The objective here is to establish the early and forceful role of the Community in managing economic and political transition in Eastern Europe as evidence of the subsequent high profile of the EC in the post-cold war security debate. Discussion of Community activity in Eastern Europe between 1988 and 1990 is drawn from Werner Ungerer, ‘The Development of the EC and its Relationship to Central and Eastern Europe’, Aussenpolitik, English edn, III (1990); J. M. Rollo, The New Eastern Europe: Western Responses (London: Pinter for RIIA, 1990), chapters 6 and 7; John Pinder, The European Community and Eastern Europe (London: Pinter for RIIA, 1991).Google Scholar
  3. 8.
    This point is made by Robin Niblett in his unpublished M.Phil thesis, The European Community and the Central European Three, 1988–91: A Study of the Community as an International Actor, University of Oxford, Trinity Term, 1993, 42–3.Google Scholar
  4. 9.
    For a detailed chronology of the internal upheaval and decision-making which led to this decision and its aftermath, see The Curtain Rises: Eastern Europe, 1989’, Los Angeles Times, Special Report, 17 December 1989.Google Scholar
  5. 10.
    Bulletin, 22/12, 1989, pp. 12–13. The European Council is composed of heads of state and government of the twelve EC member states who, since 1974, have met at biannual ‘European Summits’.Google Scholar
  6. 11.
    Christopher Brewin and Richard McAllister, ‘Annual Review of the Activities of the European Community’, Journal of Common Market Studies XXVIII, no. 4 (June 1990): 466.Google Scholar
  7. 13.
    Bulletin 22/12, 1989, p. 15.Google Scholar
  8. 17.
    A body of literature is beginning to emerge about both German planning and the complex consultations with Washington and Moscow that accompanied unification. Two accounts are Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany’s Road to Unification (Washington DC: Brookings Institution, 1993) and Renata Fritsch-Bournazel, Europe and German Unifi-cation (Oxford: Berg Press, 1992).Google Scholar
  9. 18.
    Speech by Chancellor Helmut Kohl in the Bundestag, Bonn, 28 November 1989, reproduced in Keesing’s, 37025. Also found in Adam Daniel Rotfeld and Walther Stützle, eds, Germany and Europe in Transition (Stockholm: Oxford University Press for SIPRI, 1991), 120–2.Google Scholar
  10. 20.
    Karl Kaiser, ‘Germany’s Unification’, Foreign Affairs 70, no. 1 (1991): 185.Google Scholar
  11. 21.
    Ole Wæver, ‘Three Competing Europes: German, French, Russian’, International Affairs 66, no. 3 (1990): 485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 22.
    Author’s interview with British officials in Brussels indicated that Prime Minister Thatcher was reticent to accept unification throughout December and January. However, her views had somewhat altered by the time of her 29 March meeting with Helmut Kohl. A list of individuals interviewed and conditions of citation is located at the beginning of the bibliography. See also ‘Thatcher Sees East European Progress as More Urgent Than Germans’ Unity’, Wall Street Journal, 26 January 1990; John Newhouse, ‘The Diplomatic Round: Sweeping Change’, New Yorker, 27 August 1990: 18.Google Scholar
  13. 23.
    Margaret Thatcher, The Downing Street Years (London: Harper Collins, 1993), 792.Google Scholar
  14. 24.
    See ‘Saying the Unsayable about the Germans,’ interview with Nicholas Ridley, The Spectator, 14 July 1990. The confidential memorandum composed by the Prime Minister’s private secretary, Sir Charles Powell, was leaked to the Independent on Sunday, 15 July 1990.Google Scholar
  15. 25.
    For a discussion of the French response see Pierre LeLouche, ‘Redo the European Puzzle Around NATO,’ International Herald Tribune, 18 May 1990.Google Scholar
  16. 26.
    Strong evidence for American direction and behind-the-scenes influence in making unification possible is provided by Alexander Moens, ‘American Diplomacy and German Unification’, Survival, XXXIII, no. 6 (Nov/Dec 1991). This view is reinforced by Kaiser, Unification, 1991, 188–90.Google Scholar
  17. 27.
    ‘A New Europe, a New Atlanticism: Architecture for a New Era’, address by James A. Baker III, US Secretary of State, to the Berlin Press Club, 12 December 1989. Text reproduced in Europe Documents, 15 December 1989, no. 1588; US Department of State, Current Policy Documents, no. 1233, December 1989.Google Scholar
  18. 28.
    This is not to say that all US opinion leaders were as enlightened about the process. Former Secretary of State Alexander Haig cautioned: ‘No one fears the Germany of good times, the Germany of Helmut Kohl. It is the Germany of bad times, with a leader not yet on the horizon, that rattles the skeletons of history.’ (‘An Alliance for All Europe’, New York Times, 18 January 1990).Google Scholar
  19. 30.
    For a discussion of the Soviet response to unification and to its agenda in the Two-Plus-Four negotiations, see Sergei Karaganov, ‘Implications of German Unification for the Former Soviet Union’, in Paul B. Stares, ed., The New Germany and the New Europe (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1992).Google Scholar
  20. 32.
    ‘Communiqué of the North Atlantic Council Meeting’, 7–8 June 1990, NATO Review 38, no. 3 (June 1990): 28–32.Google Scholar
  21. 33.
    Declaration of the European Council in Strasbourg on Central and Eastern Europe, 8/9 December 1989, Bulletin, 22/12, 1989, p. 14.Google Scholar
  22. 34.
    For an account of the Commission’s role in unification see David Spence, The European Community’s Negotiations on German Unification’, in W. Heisenberg, ed., German Unification in European Perspective (London: Brassey’s, 1991).Google Scholar
  23. 35.
    As Kohl repeatedly stated: ‘For us the question of German unity and the unification process of Europe are two sides of the same coin’, (‘Europe’s Alliance Seeks Closer Ties’, New York Times, 29 April, 1990).Google Scholar
  24. 36.
    The academic debate about the changing nature of security in the period after 1989 is extensive. See inter alia: Jessica Tuchman Mathews, ‘Redefining Security’, Foreign Affairs 68, no. 2 (Spring 1989); Loescher; Helga Haftendorn, ‘The Security Puzzle: Theory-Building and Discipline-Building in International Security’, International Studies Quarterly 35 (1991); Ken Booth, ed., New Thinking about Strategy and International Security (HarperCollins: London, 1991); Karl E. Birnbaum, Josef B. Binter, and Stephen K. Badzik, eds, Towards a Future European Peace Order? (London: Macmillan, 1991); Oliver Ramsbotham and Hugh Miall, eds, Beyond Deterrence: Britain, Germany and the New European Security Debate (London: Macmillan, 1991); Lars Björkborn and Suedin Ono, ‘Environmental Security and the Long-term European Situation’, in Bo Huldt and Gunilla Herolf, Yearbook 1990–91: Towards a New European Security Order (Stockholm: Swedish Institute of International Affairs). Not everyone agreed with this redefinition of security and many academics and policymakers argued that existing security structures remained relevant. See Daniel Deudney, ‘The Case against Linking Environmental Degradation and National Security’, Millennium 19 no. 3 (1990).Google Scholar
  25. 37.
    Jan Zielonka, ‘Europe’s Security: a Great Confusion’, International Affairs 67, no. 1 (1991): 128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 38.
    See Stanley Sloan, ‘NATO’s Future in a New Europe: an American Per-spective’, International Affairs 3 (1990): 488–99; Ronald Steel, ‘Germany in NATO? Not Important’, New York Times, 28 June 1990.Google Scholar
  27. 39.
    For an endorsement of the CSCE’s ‘special role’ in overcoming the division of Europe see Erika B. Schlager, ‘Does CSCE Spell “Stability” for Europe?’, Cornell International Law Journal 24 (1991).Google Scholar
  28. 40.
    Jacques Delors, ‘Europe’s Ambitions’, Foreign Policy, 80 (Fall 1990): 18.Google Scholar
  29. 42.
    The Vienna Talks on Confidence and Security Building Measures in Europe were conducted through the CSCE and the CFE talks, begun in March 1989, were an ‘autonomous conference’ within the CSCE framework. For a discussion of this arrangement see Arie Bloed, From Helsinki to Vienna: Basic Documents on the Helsinki Process (Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff, 1990), 22–4.Google Scholar
  30. 43.
    Washington Post, 23 January 1989, cited by Marianne Hanson, The Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe: the Evolution of a Code of Conduct in East-West Relations, unpublished D.Phil thesis, University of Oxford, Michaelmas Term, 1992, 332.Google Scholar
  31. 44.
    The French were also supportive although it was unclear what Mitterrand intended by his proposal for a ‘confederation based on the Helsinki Agreements.’ ‘See Mitterrand’s New Year Address, ‘Les voeux de M. François Mitterrand’, Le Monde, 2 January 1990.Google Scholar
  32. 45.
    For analysis of Gorbachev’s proposal see: Robert L. Pfaltzgraff Jr. et al., ‘The Atlantic Alliance and European Security in the 1990s’, Cornell International Law Journal, 23, no. 3 (Spring 1990): 494–5; Wæver, 482; Neil Malcolm, ‘The Common European Home and Soviet European Policy’, International Affairs 65, no. 4 (1989).Google Scholar
  33. 46.
    German Foreign Minister H.D. Genscher quoted in The European, 11–13 May 1990, cited in Wæver, 487.Google Scholar
  34. 47.
    See ‘Polish Proposal on the Outline of the Council of European Cooperation in the Framework of the CSCE process’, Warsaw, 10 March 1990, reproduced in Rotfeld and Stützle, 134. For the Czechoslovakian proposal for a ‘Commission for European Security’ see speech by Foreign Minister Jiri Dienstbier at the Warsaw Treaty Organization Meeting, 17 March 1990, reproduced in Rotfeld and Stützle, 139.Google Scholar
  35. 48.
    Speech by Hans Dietrich Genscher at the Tutzing Protestant Academy, 31 January 1990, Statements and Speeches, XIII, no. 2.Google Scholar
  36. 49.
    London Declaration on a Transformed North Atlantic Alliance, Heads of State and Government, North Atlantic Council Meeting, London, 5–6 July 1990, reproduced in Europe Documents, 10 July 1990, no. 1635.Google Scholar
  37. 50.
    Charter of Paris for a New Europe, Meeting of the Heads of State or Government of the participating States of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE), Paris, 19–21 November 1990.Google Scholar
  38. 53.
    Thomas Friedman, ‘A Baltic Chill on Relations’, New York Times, 8 April 1990, cited in Stanley R. Sloan, ‘NATO’s Future in a New Europe: an American Perspective’, International Affairs 63, no. 3 (1990): 500. Sloan points out that the NSC has been the most resistant to the prospect of transatlantic security reform whereas the State Department has been willing to consider new structures.Google Scholar
  39. 54.
    For the arguments that NATO must adapt to the new security environment see inter alia: Pierre Hassner, ‘Europe Beyond Partition and Unity: Disintegration or Reconstitution?’, International Affairs 66, no. 3 (1990); Emil J. Kirchner and James Sperling, The Future Germany and the Future of NATO’, German Politics, 1, no. 1 (April 1992); Richard Ullman, Securing Europe (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991), 53–63.Google Scholar
  40. 56.
    ‘Moscow’s New Olive Branch: Shevardnadze, in Warsaw, Sees End to Military Alliances’, International Herald Tribune, 27 November 1989.Google Scholar
  41. 57.
    Text of the Report of the Committee of Three on Non-Military Cooperation, approved by the North Atlantic Council on 13 December 1956, The North Atlantic Treaty Organization: Facts and Figures, 11th edn, (Brussels: NATO Information Service, 1989): 385.Google Scholar
  42. 58.
    ‘Euro-muscle: This Week’s Summit Heralds New Era in Global Compe-tition: the US vs. Europe’, Wall Street Journal, 15 July 1991.Google Scholar
  43. 59.
    For a discussion of American concern of ‘structural disarmament’ see Henry Owen and Edward C. Meyer, ‘Central European Security’, Foreign Affairs (Summer 1989): 25.Google Scholar
  44. 60.
    ‘Belgium Plans to Withdraw its NATO Units in Germany,’ International Herald Tribune, 20 January 1990; ‘Dutch Upset NATO by Troop Cuts in Germany’, The Independent, 27 January 1990.Google Scholar
  45. 61.
    For a discussion of US troop cuts and impact on US force posture see excerpts from Sam Nunn’s speech to the US Senate, in ‘A New Europe — a New Military Strategy’, Washington Post, 24 April 1990; ‘Finding a New Role For NATO in a New Germany’, Jane’s Defence Weekly, 26 January 1991.Google Scholar
  46. 62.
    ‘For NATO, an Identity Crisis’, International Herald Tribune, 20 November 1990.Google Scholar
  47. 63.
    Communiqué of the North Atlantic Council Meeting, 14–15 December 1989, Keesing’s, 37112.Google Scholar
  48. 64.
    ‘NATO Aims for Role in Shaping Europe’, The Times, 16 December 1989.Google Scholar
  49. 65.
    ‘Defining NATO’s Role in a New Europe’, International Herald Tribune, 6 April 1990.Google Scholar
  50. 73.
    For an excellent discussion of French security interests see Peter Schmidt, ‘French Security Policy Ambitions’, Aussenpolitik, English edn, 44, no. 4 (1993).Google Scholar
  51. 75.
    Speech by NATO Secretary-General Manfred Wörner in Hamburg, 8 February 1990, reproduced in Jamie Shea, NATO 2000: a Political Agenda for a Political Alliance, Brassey’s Atlantic Commentaries (London: Brassey’s, 1990) appendix IV, 130–31.Google Scholar
  52. 76.
    ‘NATO Warns EC Against Trying to Run Before It Can Walk’, Financial Times, 21 September 1990.Google Scholar
  53. 77.
    The Gulf War reaffirmed this determination. See ‘EC Role Sought on Security’, International Herald Tribune, 23 September 1990.Google Scholar
  54. 78.
    Communiqué of the North Atlantic Council, Brussels, December 1990, NATO Review 38, no. 6 (December 1990): 22.Google Scholar
  55. 80.
    Europe, 20 April 1990, no. 5238. The Franco-German proposal elaborated upon an earlier Belgian memorandum which suggested the need to review Community institutions and to give greater emphasis to cooperation in security issues. See Europe Documents, 29 March 1990, no. 1608. The UK, Portugal and Luxembourg were initially opposed to the Belgian plan but following the Franco-German letter, only Britain maintained its opposition to another IGC.Google Scholar
  56. 81.
    Jürgen Nötzold and Reinhardt Rummel, ‘On the Way to a New European Order’, Aussenpolitik, English edn, III (1990): 213.Google Scholar
  57. 85.
    ‘Brittan Proposes Defence Role for EC Within NATO’, Financial Times, 18 May 1990. This was the first and last public reference by a senior official to nuclear weapons being included in the defence identity of the Community. According to the author’s interviews with officials at the FCO, the subject was far too sensitive to be part of the debate and was not raised in internal negotiations.Google Scholar
  58. 87.
    ‘European Army Proposed for One Germany: WEU Leader’s Plan would End Role of American Troops,’ Wall Street Journal, 23 February 1990.Google Scholar
  59. 88.
    Anand Menon, Anthony Forster and William Wallace, ‘A Common European Defence?’, Survival 34, no. 3 (Autumn 1992), 104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 90.
    Álvaro de Vasconcelos, ‘Portugal, the Gulf Crisis and WEU’, in Nicole Gnesotto and John Roper, eds, Western Europe and the Gulf (Paris: Western European Union Institute for Security Studies, 1992), 117.Google Scholar
  61. 91.
    ‘Italy Says EC Should Consider Forming its Own “Army For Defence”’, The Independent, 19 September 1990.Google Scholar
  62. 92.
    Report of Manfred Wörner Press Conference, Brussels, 20 September 1990, Atlantic News, 28 September 1990.Google Scholar
  63. 93.
    ‘De Michelis Wants EC to Take Over Defence Policy Role’, Financial Times, 19 September 1990.Google Scholar
  64. 94.
    This point is made by Trevor Salmon, ‘Testing Times for European Political Cooperation: the Gulf and Yugoslavia, 1990–1992’, International Affairs 68, no. 2 (1992): 237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 96.
    COREPER, the Committee of Permanent Representatives, is composed of representatives of national governments and was the key body charged with negotiating the IGC. See ‘EC Report Backs Single Defence Policy’, The Independent, 4 October 1990.Google Scholar
  66. 97.
    ‘Britain Urges EC to Bear More of NATO Burden’, The Guardian, 5 December 1990.Google Scholar
  67. 101.
    H. G. Poettering, ‘The EC on the Way Towards a Common Security Policy’, Aussenpolitik, English edn, 11 (1991): 149.Google Scholar
  68. 102.
    Address by Jacques Poos, 6 December 1990, reproduced in Armand Clesse and Raymond Vernon, The European Community after 1992: a New Role in World Politics? (Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, 1991), 34.Google Scholar
  69. 103.
    ‘Paris and Bonn Offer EC Security Plan’, International Herald Tribune, 8 December 1990.Google Scholar
  70. 104.
    ‘UK Changes Tone Over EC Political Union Talks’, Financial Times, 15/16 December 1990.Google Scholar
  71. 105.
    ‘Hurd Falls Out with the EC on Defence’, The Guardian, 11 December 1990; ‘Europe’s New Defence Role’, Financial Times, 17 December 1990.Google Scholar
  72. 106.
    Europe, 16 December 1990, no. 5393.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Andrew Wyatt-Walter 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Holly Wyatt-Walter

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations